Talk:It's Nobody's Fault but Mine

Songwriter credit for Zeppelin version
Is it a good idea to add Johnson to the songwriter parameter for the Zeppelin version? Probably because there is no evidence that Johnson or his successors ever filed for the copyright for his original, there have been no challenges to Plant's and Page's claim (unlike those for their adaptations of other blues songs). So, the songwriter credits on LZ releases only read "Plant & Page". However, several RS unequivocally state that the Zeppelin song is an adaptation of Johnson's song (Davis p. 264, Shadwick p. 244, Wall p. 346). Other non-Zeppelin adaptations usually credit Johnson or someone else (often the recording artist). For the infobox for Johnson's original recording, his name was added as the songwriter, based on the sources and BMI. So the question may be, should we go with what RSs are indicating or the current copyright claimant? —Ojorojo (talk) 15:53, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * There is no dispute the song existed before Page & Plant were born. Technically they are claiming to be songwriters because the copyright either 1. Never existed, or 2. Had expired. Probably half a dozen other possibilities as well. What Page and Plant can only be claiming (and is normal practice) is for the arrangement of the song. This entitles them to 'royalties' as arrangers. This is the usual and general way of claiming those royalties. Credits should read 'Arranged by' but that's something that doesn't always happen. I am happy for you to change back, but it is misleading to have two lots of people writing the same song - which was what I was trying to explain with my edit. Damn shame I recently gave all my songwriting royalty explaining books away recently... --Richhoncho (talk) 16:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree that it may be misleading just to show Plant and Page and I'm all for giving credit where credit is due. It's just that in the past, certain Page fan(s) have tried to muck it up. I suppose we can wait and see. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * There's always people who think they need to 'big up' somebody rather than being factual. --Richhoncho (talk) 16:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * We should not bring our own opinion into the infobox. We should state what the copyright does. That it had never been correctly applied and had expired by the time P&P reworked it is not germane to the discussion of the change to the infobox, but it should be discussed in the article. The change to the infobox should be reverted. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll go with whatever the consensus is on this. Maybe a compromise, similar to "Beck's Bolero":
 * Songwriter(s)   Jimmy Page·Robert Plant (credited, see text)
 * —Ojorojo (talk) 18:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It's been a week. I'm going to be bold and add the above wording, which should be OK with everyone. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:28, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Duration template

 * A Template:Duration was removed from one of the infoboxes and replaced with the standard minutes and seconds format ("3:09"). Some editors have also been removing them from song and album infoboxes, but I haven't seen any recent discussions regarding the template. The result of a 2013 TdF was "keep" and using it seems to be the standard practice. Has this changed? —Ojorojo (talk) 14:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I was told that the template is used by infobox album if only one time is present but is required if more than one is present. I believed that was the same case as with infobox song. If it's not the case for either, then I would be glad to modify my practice. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:48, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I think came up with the Infobox song wording "An hAudio microformat is added automatically for the first duration detected ... If there is more than one length specified in the parameter, or the page appears in Category:Duration without hAudio microformat (2,834), use [Template:Duration]". Maybe they can explain it, but I thought [Template:Duration] must always be used for a single or first occurrence (not added automatically – there are many 3:09 without [Template:Duration] that remain unchanged). Also Songs and Albums should be harmonized, so editors don't have to remember which uses which. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Albums is the better one if it can avoid the use of the extra template. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:10, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

The microformat info is unnecessary to explain the parameter's use for editors. Also, it is unclear when Duration should be added, so I am tempted to be bold and remove it from the Infobox song guidance and replace it with:

length

Enter the length of the song in minutes and seconds using a colon to separate the two, such as. Do not use "3 minutes and nine seconds", 3' 9", etc. Template:Duration may also be used:  which will produce "3:09". A seconds value must be included; use "3:00" if the song is timed to three minutes only. The length should be taken from the original album or single release, instead of reissues, downloads, etc.  For multiple entries, see Notes[2] for details.

Maybe this will prompt someone to clarify the proper use of Duration. The Category:Duration without hAudio microformat can be added to the "Tracking categories" section at the bottom, where it makes more sense.

—Ojorojo (talk) 14:52, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If it doesn't cause problems going forward, I think the change should be made, yes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The module is invoked in the infoboxes, but the module will only add one set of microformats automatically (so if an infobox transclusion contains 1:23&lt;br&gt;4:56, only  will have microformats added). It's not necessary to use Duration if there is only one duration in the infobox. Jc86035 (talk) 10:13, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding. If it's being added automatically, shouldn't all infobox songs have at least one use of Duration? Many Category:Tom Petty songs just have a single plain "4:14"-type entry. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * No, they would use Module:Hms but not Duration. If you use Special:ExpandTemplates (or your browser's element inspector) you can see which infoboxes have the microformats added. Jc86035 (talk) 16:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * OK. Then how about the template documentation wording? Maybe:

"Enter the length of the song in minutes and seconds using a colon to separate the two, such as . Do not use "3 minutes and 9 seconds", 3' 9", etc. If additional lengths are entered, use Template:Duration for the second and subsequent lengths:  will produce "3:09". A seconds value must be included; use "3:00" if the song is timed to three minutes only. The length should be taken from the original album or single release, instead of reissues, downloads, etc. For multiple entries, see Notes[2] for details."


 * —Ojorojo (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that makes sense, although  would also work and could be a more appropriate recommendation. Jc86035 (talk) 09:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

It would be better if the wording for both infobox song and album were consistent. Maybe (with Jc86035's suggestion) something like:

For Infobox song#length

Enter the length of the song in minutes and seconds using a colon to separate the two, such as. Do not use "3 minutes and 9 seconds", 3' 9", etc. If additional lengths are entered, use Template:Duration for the second and subsequent lengths:   will produce "3:09". A seconds value must be included; enter "3:00" if the song is timed to three minutes only. The length should be taken from the original album or single release, instead of reissues, downloads, etc.  For multiple entries, see Notes for details.

For Infobox album#length

Enter the length of the album in minutes and seconds, even if it is longer than one hour. Use a colon to separate the two, such as ; do not use "71 minutes and 9 seconds", 71' 9", 1:11:09, etc. A seconds value must be included; enter "71:00" if the album is timed to 71 minutes only.

Usually, only the length of the original album release should be entered. The timing of reissues or other releases, such as with bonus tracks, should be added to a "Releases" or similar section in the main body of the article, if noteworthy. For albums that are released with multiple track listings simultaneously, only list the most common length or that of the standard edition of the album. In the exceptional case when multiple entries are justified, use Template:Duration for the second and subsequent lengths:  will produce "71:09". For multiple entries, use Template:Plainlist (see the template documentation for details). —Ojorojo (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * That looks good and harmonizing both is a good idea. I suggest using duration rather than Template:Duration; plainlist rather than Template:Plainlist. It appears that's what the current documentation does. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:18, 9 January 2020 (UTC)